KOFI SEGBEDZI & OTHERS v. ASHRIFIE AKRONG

J U D G M E N T

KUSI-APPIAH, J.A.: This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court (Land Division), Accra, over a disputed ownership of a house situated at Nima, a suburb of Accra, and numbered as E84/11.

The facts which gave rise to the dispute were as follows: One Kojo Akrong who died intestate in 1945 was the person who built the house. That was not disputed by the plaintiffs/appellants. However, plaintiffs averred that upon the demise of Kojo Akrong, the property in dispute devolved on his children and between 1972 and 1983, Ibrahim Lassey Akrong whom plaintiffs described as the eldest son of Kojo Akrong initially leased the property to plaintiffs and subsequently sold same with the knowledge and consent of his brothers and sisters to them.

The plaintiffs alleged that the sale was evidenced by a conveyance duly executed by Lassey Akrong in their favour. They contended that after the sale, they assumed ownership and possession of the property without any objection from any member of the family or siblings of Ibrahim Lassey Akrong.

The plaintiff further averred that in course of time, Ibrahim Lassey Akrong died and his only surviving sister, Atswei Akrong also died in 1986. Subsequently, the defendant suddenly emerged, claiming to be the eldest surviving son of the late Kojo Akrong and thus a beneficial owner of the subject property which he claimed to be his family property. He therefore issued a writ of summons in the High Court claiming:

“a. A declaration that a valid transfer of title has taken place on a piece of property known as H/No. E.84/11, Nima to the three plaintiffs who are now the real owners of same.

b. An order of perpetual injunction to prohibit the defendant, his agents and successors from interfering with the peace and quiet of plaintiffs to their property.”

The defendant resisted the plaintiffs claim by his statement of defence and counterclaim filed on 9th October, 1997 and denied that the plaintiffs are entitled to any of the reliefs claimed or at all.

The defendant’s paragraphs 5, 6, 9, 11 and 12 of his statement of defence aforesaid, contain the bedrock of his title to the land in dispute. They read:

“5. In an answer to paragraph 3 of the plaintiffs’ statement of claim, the defendant says that he is the eldest child of the late Kojo Akrong, and in his capacity as such states that there has been no alienation of the property in dispute which is family property to the plaintiffs or to any other persons and that even i